A.Pugazhendhi v. Sivakumar
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court upheld an extension request for the appellant to deposit ₹2 lakhs as a condition of anticipatory bail. One week time was granted; failure to deposit results in vacating the bail.
What did the court decide?
Granted one week time to deposit ₹2 lakhs; bail to be vacated if not deposited.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Monday, the Thirteenth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.11473 of 2021
IN CRL OP.985/2021
A.PUGAZHENDHI [ PETITIONER / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ]
Vs
1 SIVAKUMAR [ 1st RESPONDENT / PETITIONER ]
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ 2nd RESPONENT / RESPONDENT ] NEMILI POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT. RANIPETTAI DISTRICT.
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to 1st Respondent herein by way of order dated 19.04.2021 passed in Crl.O.P.No.985 of 2021 by this Hon`ble Court.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant an extension of time for deposit of bail money by the appellant.
Whether to vacate anticipatory bail if the amount is not deposited within the extended time.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
A. PUGAZHENDHI
- appellant
SIVAKUMAR
- respondent
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMILI POLICE STATION
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court